Bethesda news, restaurants, nightlife, events and openings, real estate, crime reports and more - the way only a lifelong Bethesda resident like Robert Dyer can bring it to you. Everything you want and need to know about Bethesda, plus special investigative reports you won't find anywhere else. The must-read blog for breaking Bethesda news, when you want to be the first to know.

Friday, June 09, 2017

Berliner and Westbard developer made a great team in sector plan push

New documents reveal more of the extensive cooperation between Montgomery County Council President Roger Berliner and Westbard developer Equity One (now known as Regency Centers). In my last report, we learned that Berliner was in a "life coach" role for the developer, advising the firm how to deal with you, the pesky NIMBYs, er, taxpaying constituents.

One email shows that Berliner again met privately with Equity One's Michael Berfield and the firm's attorney, Barbara Sears, a week before the firm unveiled its initial proposal to the public at Walt Whitman High School on March 18, 2014. In a follow-up email, Berfield makes an intriguing reference to the possibility that, "As we discussed," Equity One would "provide you with some additional information that may be useful during the Council's budget discussions in April."

Considering a private development project - especially one like Westbard involving no major parks, no new schools or even additions to existing schools, no new County facilities, and no publicly-funded transportation improvements - has virtually no relevance to the County budget...what was this "information," and how would it be "useful" to Berliner?

The next set of emails come from the late phase of the sector plan discussions, when Berliner was fashioning what he would call the "Berliner Alternative" behind the scenes with Equity One. At the meeting he unveiled his "alternative" at before the Springfield Civic Association, Berliner stressed that "developers would not guide his final decisions in the process. 'What guides me is whether or not what is proposed...enhances our community,' not development interests, he said."

Behind the scenes, it turns out, developers were indeed guiding the process.

On February 16, 2016, a "draft letter" from Berfield is sent to Berliner for his review, and to County Council staff member Marlene Michaelson, whose staff report ultimately became the ground rules for the final debate on the sector plan. Berliner's Chief of Staff, Cindy Gibson, advises Sears later that day to make changes to the letter. It was apparently input for a memo Berliner would release to formalize his "Berliner alternative."

Still later on the 16th, Gibson tells Sears, "We needed to pull the trigger today," in apparent reference to the Berliner memo. That involved language on two points being "modified" - "I hope in an acceptable manner," Gibson writes deferentially to Sears.

Sears writes back forty minutes later, advising Berliner's office that there are "things in the memo which will cause Equity One some problems." The "problems," Sears writes, are the requirement of the paltry 1/2-acre postage stamp civic green, realignment of Westbard Avenue to connect it directly to River Road, and the Willett Branch.

Gibson replies that, "I had not identified those as controversial (sic) so I apologize...Michael [Berfield] can certainly oppose any language in this memo he feels is not in his best interest."

Ultimately, the Berliner Alternative memo would end up being very much in the developer's interest - so much so, that Equity One used Berliner's memo in its own PR campaign. But hardly in the best interest of Berliner's political career. The Berliner Alternative dropped like a rock when released, blasted by the vast majority of his Westbard constituents.

Only the Citizens Coordinating Committee on Friendship Heights endorsed the plan - without polling its member organizations first. Interestingly, two days ago, as many as five members of the CCCFH formally endorsed Berliner's quixotic bid for County Executive.

You do realize that real estate taxes are a major portion of the county budget? Redeveloping an under utilized aging strip mall into a mixed use property with significantly more value has a huge impact on the county budget. On top of that the added residents will increase county income tax revenue and sales tax revenues.

10:39: That revenue theory has been thoroughly disproven. After the massive growth earlier this century, instead of being flush with cash, the County is in a structural deficit every year. It turns out the cost of the new residents exceeds the revenue they generate. Period. Even George Leventhal admitted this finally.

10:39 here - Leventhal is a Democrat who loves government spending so of course he says that. If there were any true pro-growth, pro-busniess republicans in the county they would be telling a very different story. Unfortunately even the so-called republicans like yourself and Robin Ficker are really just angrier versions of the same anti-business democrats who have been running the county for years.

So CCCFHers support Berliner. That explains a lot. They eagerly pushed the Berliner "compromise" on Westbard residents ... who revolted. The CCCFH Board members' endorsement of Berliner's candidacy is troubling; why invite the charge that they work for and protect the Council's interests rather than those of the residents? CCCFH would do well to distance itself from Berliner as he was the architect of the Westbard Debacle.

1:15: No one has ever accused me of being an "angry" person. What is your explanation for why we are locked in a structural deficit for as far out as the projections go, if development revenue exceeds the cost of providing services, schools and infrastructure for the new residents?

We had massive, massive development over the last couple of decades, and we are literally flat broke. Under your theory - touted by everyone on the Council - we should be flush with cash at this point.

Why aren't we? Why are we instead in the red? These are the real numbers, not a theory.

2:01: CCCFH was also in favor of the EYA Little Falls Place development. I know, because their attorney was undercutting my arguments to stop it at every turn in front of the Planning Board. Favoring the developer over the interests of residents and the environment. We also didn't know then if the cemetery was under the Hoyt property.

This isn't about party affiliation. It's about selling a community, it's residents, it's children, it's local merchants, it's schools, and it's future to a conglomerate of corporate interests who don't give a crap about your daily welfare and who won't be around when just a little more of your sanity is replaced with an exotic flavor of coffee and unlimited soup and bread sticks. They've brainwashed everyone into thinking that the only way to have something nice and new is to have it one way only... their way. This community is filled with highly educated, well traveled, successful people who are being told that they are too stupid to know what's good for them. Yes, every square inch of their community needs to be milked for currency because there is absolutely no value to a square meter of earth that doesn't have a credit card processing machine on it or some sort of tax assessment.

It's probably too late to stop any of this, but ... wake up! Look around at the latest hottest carpetbagging trends. You're constantly being duped into downsizing you're quality assets and existence for a smaller and more economically and spiritually expensive shiny new "lifestyle". Wake up.

Not saying if he had tax liabilities or not. But if he's run for office, he had to be up to date with filing tax returns. Is it common for local political candidates to release their returns like national pols do?

Why are CCCFH Board members publicly supporting Berliner, and by implication, his Westbard vote? Aren't they supposedly community leaders? CCCFH should poll its member organizations and find out what they think of their "leadership." I heard that seven civic associations support the lawsuit; shouldn't that fact influence CCCFH's public stance on Westbard?

@7:07 CCCFH most certainly DOES "REPRESENT" those SEVEN associations. CHECK their website; cccfhmd.org. Why, in fact, those SEVEN associations represent nearly 73% of the residents "covered" by CCCFH. Their acronym is a misnomer; but you probably knew that. CCCFH is out of touch and irrelevant.

I agree with 2:01 pm and 4:09 pm: CCCFH really needs to re-evaluate and represent its member communities. My understanding is that a majority of active CCCFH member communities have voted to support the Westbard lawsuit. If so, CCCFH needs to change its position or stand down.

If CCCFH isn't representing its members, what credibility does it have?